American cinematographer (Apr 1929)

Four AMERICAN CINEMATOGRAPHER April, 1929 V* The Dawley Patent An Opinion by the Firm of Prindle, Wright, Neal and Bean Patent Attorneys of New York This Dawley patent was filed August 17, 1914, when the art of making motion pictures was in its infancy. The inventor was a practical man engaged in motion pictures at that time, and realizing the tremendous ex- pense incurred directly and indirectly due to the cost of sets, drops and other scenery, and the time consumed in making the same, made the improvement in the art disclosed and claimed in the patent. He also clearly recognized the advantages of being able to use photo- graphs of distant locations to make a background for the action, and sets forth all of these advantages in con- siderable detail in the specification of his patent. His invention resides broadly in effecting photographic images of a photograph of a set or scene on the nega- tive and in effecting photographs of the actors and neces- sary property supplementing the same on the negative, in such a manner that the two sets of images or photo- graphs properly merge in the complete negative, whereby the same effect is produced as if the action took place directly in front and in connection with an original back- ground, scene, set or the like. The inventor describes in detail the various ways^ in which this method may be practiced, and his specification shows that he has a comprehensive grasp of all the prob- lems involved in making motion pictures in this manner and discloses various practical ways in which his inven- tion could be put into successful use. As an illustration of the extent to which the inventor had thought out the problem and the solution thereof, we call your attention to the statement appearing on page 1 of the specification, lines 78 to 84, inclusive, which read as follows: , . ^ • v, + “I accomplish these objects by utilizing photo- graphic images of the sets or scenery instead of using real sets or scenery, the photographic images being photographed either directly, or by reflection, or by projection, or jointly directly, reflectively or projectively. “In making a picture, the photographing of the actors who are enacting the story or plot, and^ the photographing of the photographic image constitut- ing the background or set may be effected either simultaneously or successively.” The inventor then proceeds to describe these various suo'gested methods in greater detail, and as stated above, we” are impressed with the comprehensive manner in which he viewed and solved his problem. A complete reading of the specification is necessary to fully appre- ciate this. . , . , To repeat, the inventor’s mam object was the saving of expense and time and the reduction of the cost of making motion pictures by effecting photographic images of a background or set on a negative in connection with photographs of the action. This method or process is very broadly covered in the claims in the patent, and especially in claims 1 and 5 thereof. Claim 1 includes the following steps involved in this invention in the art of making motion pictures: 1. Effecting photographic images of a photo- graph of a set or scene on the negative; 2. Effecting photographs of actors and prop- erties supplementing the same. 3. The images of the photograph (background) being photographed at such a point in the range of the camera as to be relatively small and properly merge with the field covered by the living actors. Claim 5 expresses substantially the same thought, in- cluding the following steps: 1. Effecting photographic images of a photo- graph of a set or scene on the negative. 2. Superimposing thereon photographic images of actors and properties supplementing the same. 3. Same as claim 1. Claim 2 is quite similar to claim 1, being limited in that it calls for simultaneously effecting photographic images of the photograph of the set or scene and of the action. Claim 3 is exactly like claim 1, except for the limita- tion added thereto specifying that the photographing is effected simultaneously by reflection and directly. Claim 4 defines the same general process, but includes specifically that the background is formed by effecting photographs of a reflected image of the set or scene and that the photographs of the actors are effected di- rectly. Claim 6 brings in details involved in the practice of the process, including effecting photographic images of the actors in front of a black background, and specify- ing that the floor line of the images of the photograph of the set or scene coincides with the stage on which the actors move. Claim 7 is similar to claim 6, but differs in that it de- fines the invention in greater detail in that it recites that the black background has openings therein corresponding with the exit and entrance openings in the photographs so as to secure exit and entrance effects. When the Dawley application for patent was filed it included ten claims, the first three of which wex'e specific to a motion picture positive film, and the last seven of which were directed to the art of making motion pic- tures. The Patent Office at once required division be- tween the first three claims and the last seven claims on the ground that they covered independent inventions. This is a customary formal requirement and was com- plied with by the cancellation of the three claims directed to the positive film. The attorney for the inventor added two more claims directed to the art of making motion pictures. In the first official action by the Patent Office the following patents were cited, without specifically re- jecting any of the claims: Bruce (British) No. 15,192, of 1886; (1 sheet) Messter (British) No. 23,623, of 1910; (1 sheet) (88-24) Knight, No. 1,102,595, July 7, 1914; Fitch, 663,267, Dec. 4, 1900; Engelsmann, No. 1,019,141, March 5, 1912; (88-24) After the cancellation of the three claims and the addi- tion of the two claims above referred to, the Examiner in the Patent Office cited the following additional pat- ents : Schulze, et al. (French), 444,112, July 30, 1912 (1 sheet), (88—24) Browm (British), 6,557 of 1913 (1 sheet) Blitz (British), 7,334 of 1913 (1 sheet) (88—24) and held that no invention was involved in the claims submitted. In reply to this first rejection on the merits, the attor- ney for the inventor stated that the inventor was the first to suggest the substitution, for the usual expensive sets or natural scenery, of a photogi’aphic image. The various patents cited by the Examiner were an- alyzed as follow's in this reply: “Fitch, No. 663,267, discloses a rather involved arrangement requiring two lanterns and two screens, each projecting its own image and in con- nection with which actors may perform to a lim- ited extent with the observations always made direct by the eye, and has no reference to the motion pic- ture art; Engelsmann, No. 1,019,141, discloses an apparatus for exhibiting motion pictures, in which the pic- tures are projected on a transparent sheet of glass, through which a plastic background is observed. n- i m. It: